The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Kerala Panchayats Act and the Rules to enable panchayats to recover amounts through easy methods of collection, emphasizing the intention to ensure their smooth functioning.

Padmanabhan j.

These two criminal appeals came up before us on reference by one of us (Padmanabhan, J.), in view of the conflicting decisions in P.A. Yoosuf v. Kumaranelloor Panchayat (1973 KLT 145), K.S. Rajan v. State of Kerala and another (1983 KLT 677), Criminal Appeal Nos. 230 and 335 of 1986 as well as Criminal Appeal No. 256 of 1984 on the question whether prosecution by a panchayat for realisation of amounts due by way of arrears of rent belonging to it is maintainable.

2. In both the cases, the concerned Magistrates, following the decision in Yoosuf's case (1973 KLT 145), held that prosecution is not maintainable on the ground that what is involved is only a contractual liability, not coming within the purview of S.74 of the Kerala Panchayats Act. Therefore, the concerned accused were acquitted on that sole ground. These two criminal appeals are by the respective Panchayats.

3. The decisions in Yoosuf's case (1973 KLT 145) and Rajan's case (1983 KLT 677) were rendered on original petitions under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. The unreported decisions were pronounced in appeals against acquittals. The first decision followed Yoosuf's case (1973 KLT 145) and held that the prosecution is not maintainable. The decision in Rajan's case (1983 KLT 677) was distinguished. In the decision in Criminal Appeal No. 256 of 1984, Rajan's case was followed and Yoosuf's case (1973 KLT 145) was distinguished, on the ground that the relevant provisions were not considered therein.

4. One of the directive principles of State policy enshrined in the constitution in Art.40 is that the State should take steps to organise village Panchayats and endow them with such power and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-Government. That is what the State is endeavouring to achieve by legislations and executive actions in order to enable the panchayats to materialise the values and utility cherished by the framers of the Constitution. Village panchayats throughout the country must be enabled to form worthy and workable units, capable of acting as the backbone of the democratic set up. The powers and autonomy of the village panchayats and their utility to the nation could serve their purpose only if independent resources are made easily available to them. Otherwise, their welfare activities will come to a stand-still at the peril of democracy failing. The main resource of the panchayats is revenue through various sources.

5. Law's delays are well-known. Before a civil court, a mala fide litigant could delay the final decision for several years. The difficulties of a litigant really start when he obtains a decree in his favour. The cumbersome procedure in execution may sometimes keep the decree-holder at the mercy of a contankerous judgment-debtor, who could delay execution to indefinite levels. If a village panchayat or any other local body is equated with an ordinary citizen in the enforcement of rights and left to the necessity of contesting their claims before courts of law, their very existence will be in difficulties. Therefore, in the interpretative process, courts are having the duty to have a progressive and practical outlook bearing in mind the Constitutional directives as well as the aims and objects of the legislature and the rule making bodies in their implementation.

6. While interpreting the relevant provisions, it is advantageous to bear in mind the policy behind them. The relevant provisions in the Kerala Panchayats Act and the Rules in this respect are intended more for recovery of amounts than for penalisation. Provision for revenue recovery is there. Prosecution is provided under S.74 and the Rules only if realisation becomes impracticable by distraint and sale of movable properties of the defaulter. Demand notice is provided under R.13 of the Taxation and Appeal Rules, 1963. Distraint is provided under R.14 only if payment is not made or cause is not shown within the specified time.